ArticleEuropean review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity2026
Quality of AI-generated exercise awareness messages for older adults aligned with the ICFSR consensus: a comparative study of three LLMs.
Article in European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLarge Language Models (LLMs) are emerging as potential tools for health communication and patient education. However, their ability to translate complex medical guidelines into accessible, safe, and accurate messages for older adults remains insufficiently evaluated. To assess the capacity of ChatGPT-4, Claude AI, and Deepseek to generate exercise awareness messages for older adults, aligned with international expert consensus. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a cross-sectional observational study conducted between April and August 2025. Using the ICFSR 2021 Global Consensus on optimal exercise recommendations as the gold standard, we evaluated messages generated by three LLMs for 13 common chronic conditions in older adults. A standardized prompt was used to generate messages addressing exercise prescription considerations, disease progression, and recommended modalities. Two independent expert evaluators; a geriatrician and a sports medicine physician assessed five dimensions using a 5-point Likert scale; accuracy, clarity, safety, behavioral relevance, and absence of fabrication. Readability was measured using Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog Index (GFI), and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG). Inter-rater agreement was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
resultsClaude achieved the overall scores from both evaluators at 4.63 ± 0.55 and 4.60 ± 0.55, followed by ChatGPT-4 at 4.55 ± 0.50 and 4.48 ± 0.53 and Deepseek at 4.15 ± 0.87 and 4.17 ± 0.86. Inter-rater agreement was moderate was 0.668. Claude demonstrated accuracy scores at 4.58 ± 0.64, while ChatGPT-4 excelled in clarity with 5 ± 0. All models achieved perfect scores for absence of fabrication (5 ± 0). Readability indices revealed high complexity across all LLMs, with median FKGL values ranging from 10.84 to 10.93, corresponding to 10th-11th grade reading level, exceeding recommended levels for older populations. A significant correlation was found between Claude's accuracy scores and FKGL (r = 0.599, p = 0.030).
conclusionLLMs, particularly Claude, ChatGPT-4 and Deepseek demonstrate strong potential for generating accurate, safe, and hallucination-free exercise awareness messages for older adults. However, readability remains above recommended levels, requiring optimization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42477543What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.